1. What Is Radical About Radical Behaviorism?
Krista Glover “What is radical about radical behaviourism? ”
Early psychology took an introspective approach into investigating how the ‘mind’ worked. Conscious experience was regarded as a purely mental process that was not a publically observable behaviour. Psychologists of the time used introspective research methods to analyse and report the conscious experiences of themselves and their assistants. This popular approach to psychological research led to much controversy over the ‘scientific’ nature of psychology. The introspective research methods used within psychology were criticised for being unscientific, vague and lacking in objectivity. Further ammunition was also drawn from the verity that the experiences of one person could not …show more content…
be generalised to understand the mental capacity of another (Schwitzgebel, 2014).
Whilst psychology continued to flounder as a scientific discipline; the field physiology advanced. In 1751 Professor Robert Whytt, published his monograph on reflex behaviour and ‘the vital and other involuntary motions of animals’. His monograph outlined the principles of ‘sentient’, which refers to the ability to see or feel things. Whytt distinguished between voluntary and involuntary reflexes. Stating that voluntary reflexes, if practiced enough, became habits. These habits becoming more automatic with practice (Whytt, 1900). Such discoveries in the field of physiology helped to lay the foundations for an empirical approach to the study of psychology (Tanner, 2008).
Watson (1913) and Pavlov (1927) drew inspiration from these earlier studies on reflex behaviour. Subsequently in 1927 Pavlov uncovered the ‘conditional reflex,’ and is today renowned for classical conditioning. In 1913 Watson outlined his ideas for a new, more objective and scientific direction for psychology. Watson argued that psychology should adopt the philosophy of behaviourism and that attention should be diverted away from the study of the ‘mind,’ and private events. He instead postulated that the main focus of psychologists should be placed on the easily observable facet of stimulus – response behaviour in humans and animals. Inspired by past studies, Watson argued that it was not thoughts, but a series of involuntary responses, or reflexes combined, that formed complex behaviour (Watson, 1914).
Philosophically drawing inspiration from the theory of Evolution (Darwin, 1859), behaviourism gave an empirical, morphological, non-dualistic approach to the study of psychology by helping to identify continuity in psychological function across species. Behaviourism also rejected the concept of dualism, and explicitly defined psychology as the science of behaviour. It must be noted though that whilst Watson’s version of behaviourism could account for behaviours in primitive organisms, the theory’s great weakness lay in the fact that it could not account for the many voluntary behaviours displayed by humans (O 'Neil, 1995).
Studies by Thorndike expanded further upon the field of behaviourism by facilitating the explanation of voluntary behaviours. Thorndike studied animal intelligence, observing the way in which animals could learn instrumentally, as was evidenced in his ‘puzzle box’ experiments. Each experiment would entail of a voracious cat being placed into a ‘puzzle box’ until through trial and error the feline would pull a loop within the box to open the door. After receiving the stimulus, the subject would be returned to the box to repeat the trial. With each succeeding trial the animal would learn to make less inefficient movements, eventually leaning to immediately pull the loop on entry to the cage, as a means to escape and obtain food. Thorndike referred to this as a ‘satisfying state of affairs’, the opposite scenario would produce an ‘annoying state of affairs’. Thorndike later named this relationship between behaviour and its consequences ‘the law of effect’, identifying that behaviour was a function of its consequences (Thorndike, 1911). Thorndike was not the first to notice that consequences influenced behaviour; but instead was the first to show that behaviour could be systematically strengthened or weakened by its consequences.
Thorndike’s contribution to psychology proved to be instrumental in the understanding of learning and behaviour; laying root to the foundations of Skinner’s law of reinforcement, and Radical behaviourism.
B.F. Skinner labelled behaviours that were affected by reinforcement as operant, setting it apart from classical conditioning and involuntary, respondent ‘reflex’ behaviours. Skinner also claimed that the laws of operant behaviour could explain more complex human behaviour, solving the paradoxical quandary Watson (1913) had encountered in his studies. Modern behaviourism added the principles of operant behaviour to Watson’s (1913) and Pavlov’s (1927) findings on stimulus- response reactions to get a more cohesive understanding of behaviour. The principles of Skinners law of reinforcement stated that the acquisition of behaviour resulted from a three component contingent relationship. The interconnected relationship being between the antecedent or discriminative stimuli that preceded a response, the consequences or reinforcing stimuli that followed a response and the operant response itself. Skinner labelled his new cataloguing of behaviourism as behaviour analysis (Baum, 2011). In 1945 Skinner first used the term ‘radical behaviourism’ within his writing (Skinner , 1945) . The term radical behaviourism is also often used to refer to the school of psychology known as the experimental analysis of behaviour. Skinner described radical behaviourism as ‘throughgoing,’because unlike earlier forms of behaviourism it fully embraced all aspects of human functioning. It was ‘radical’ in the respect that it did not deny or ignore important aspects of human functions. It employed the observational methods of a natural science, supplemented with interpretive extensions, based on earlier tried and tested behavioural principles (Baum, 2011).
Though radical behaviourism stemmed from Behaviourism, it was a distinctly different philosophy. Skinner’s contribution to radical behaviourism is often mistakenly looked at from a mechanical perspective, incorrectly considered as a philosophy that is only concerned with stimulus – response behaviours, interested only in what goes into and comes out of an organism, consisting of no more than experimental techniques that ignore any private events that may occur within an animal. Unlike classical behaviourism which dismisses private events as ‘epiphenomena’, radical behaviourism does not rule out the study of private events as unscientific, as is often misconstrued. Radical behaviourism acknowledges private events but regards them as behavioural, rather than mental processes. This is because private events include thoughts, feelings, emotions and attitudes that are only observable to the person in which they reside. Radical behaviourism instead uses environmental events that change behaviour to explain caused behaviour. This is because explanations that use private events to explain a public behaviour, present a problem as they will almost certainly have an environmental explanation (Baum, 2011) .
In 1958 the first Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour (JEAB) was published. Behaviour Analysts found that many variables heavily influenced behaviour, forming the basis for the first laws of voluntary behaviour. These laws were systematically applied as interventions to behaviours to solve behavioural problems. This was achieved by focusing on the observable relationship between behaviour, in reaction to its environment, through the use of antecedents and consequences, resulting in the birth of applied behaviour analysis (ABA) (Fletcher-Janzen, 2002). ABA is still widely utilised today, most notably in the treatment of Autism. Though it has been criticised that the effectiveness of ABA may limited by diagnostic severity and IQ, (Shreck, Metz, Mulick, & Smith, 2000), (Weiss & Delmolino, 2006) its efficiency as a treatment for those with Autism is clearly evident (Myers & Johnson, 2007), (Rogers & Vismara, 2008)& (Eikeseth, 2009).
In regards to the success of ABA, many argue that modern day psychology still lives in shadow of the behaviourist revolt against introspection, its credibility tarnished. It is claimed that one of the many positives of using introspective methods is that it can give valuable insights into the more ‘human’ side of psychology; focusing less on empirical data, and more on humans as individuals (Danziger, 1980). Controversially a study by Soon, Brass, Hans-Jochen, & John-Dylan (2008) may have laid to rest the argument for the use of introspective methods in psychological research. Participants’ brain activity was simultaneously monitored by the researchers while they spontaneously decided to press a button with either their left or right index fingers. Results from the study showed that the conscious decision to push the button was made on average 1 second before the button was physically pushed. Through the analysis of a repeated patterns of neuronal brain activity, researchers could predict the outcome of the decision a participant would make up to 7 seconds before they had consciously even made the decision. A study by Fried, Mukamel, & Kreiman (2011) expanded further by studying individuals with electrodes implanted into their brains, as part of a surgical procedure to treat epilepsy. The experiment showed activity in individual neurons of particular brain areas on average 1.5 seconds before a participant had made a conscious decision to press the button. This meant that the researchers could predict the timing of a decision on average 700 milliseconds before the conscious decision was made to do so. The results from these studies imply that conscious decision is in fact secondary to brain activity, with unconscious brain activity shaping the decisions an individual makes. Far from being held ‘hostage’ by neuronal brain activity the results suggest a ‘dualism’ between the conscious mind and brain activity, working in harmony with beliefs and desires (Soon, Brass, Hans-Jochen, & John-Dylan, 2008). This holds major consequences for the argument for the use of humanistic approaches to psychology and introspective research methods. It must be considered that if an individual’s conscious is encoded so closely in brain activity, it is almost certainly impossible to make a distinction between brain activity and the conscious ‘mind’. This renders introspective methods obsolete with the advances of modern day technology. Furthermore it suggests that the conscious ‘mind’ and brain activity are not two separate entities existing in two separate spaces, but rather different aspects of the same physical process. The brain containing a deterministic mechanism that unfolds, leading the conscious decisions an individual makes at a later point in time. This insinuates that the decisions one makes are inevitable, extinguishing an argument for freewill. These recent studies only strengthen the argument for the research methods used within radical behaviourism as it uses environmental causes to explain behaviour, rather than mentalism.
In 1957 Skinner applied his focus to the human behaviour of linguistics. His book ‘Verbal Behaviour’ was almost entirely theoretical, involving little experimental research. Noam Chomsky (1959) attacked Skinner’s book, misunderstanding, the distinction between experimental analysis, interpretation, and the relation between the two in the field of radical behaviourism. From the perspective of most behaviour analysts Chomsky’s review was ill conceived. Though rhetorically effective it was also conceptually flawed (Palmer, 2006). This consequently sparked what is referred to by its factions as the ‘Cognitive Revolution’, though this is questionable, as ABA techniques are far from obsolete and still widely used today.
Fortunately radicallism is by no means ‘dead’ as cogintive revolutionists may claim.
Radical behaviourism was indeed ‘radical’, challenging the traditional notions of freedom and dignity, adding validity to a field previously considered ‘unscientific’. It forced society to consider the possibiltity that all organisms, no matter what their species, are controlled by contingencies of reinforcement, with society being nothing more than a set of contingences of reiforcement. Radical behaviourism will forever be challenged as it creates an unsettling, almost incomphrenhensible image that mankind is not autonomous, and is in no way a unique organism. By graciously accepting such within the scientfic community, the technology of behaviour has been used to significanly reduce the aversive consquences of behaviour, and maximise the achievement of indivduals who may have previously been considered lost causes, for example in the treatment of those on the autistic spectrum. The confidence in the effectiveness of ABA techniques is evidenced the recommendations for further investment in the future development of ABA (Clement- Jones & Baldwin, 2011). It could be agrued that advances in cognitive neuroscience weaken a case for the validity of radical behaviourism, but this is untrue; exciting studies by Soon, Brass, Hans-Jochen, & John-Dylan (2008) & Fried, Mukamel, & Kreiman (2011) have only added further staying power to the behaviourist movement, strengthenng an arguement against freewill. Technological advances in the cognitive neuroscience of psychology provides a means of progressing the field of psychology further by combining both proven radical behaviourism techniques and modern advances in cognitive neuroscience. Radical behaviourim is by no means dead, it is merely
evolving.
References
Baum, W. M. (2011). What is Radical Behaviourism? A review of Jay Moore 's Conceptual Foundations of Radical Behaviourism. Journal of Experiemental Analysis of Behaviour, 1(95), 119-126. doi:10.1901/jeab.2011.95-119
Chomsky, N. (1959). Review of Veral Behaviour, by B.F. Skinner. Language(35), 26-57.
Clement- Jones, L., & Baldwin, N. (2011, March 17). The Cost- Effectiveness of Early Intervention. Retrieved from Ambitious About Autism: http://www.ambitiousaboutautism.org.uk/lib/liDownload/224/Early%20Intervention%20HoL%20Debate_AmbitiousAboutAutism%20briefing_150311.pdf?CFID=22037642&CFTOKEN=36916020
Danziger, K. (1980). The History of Introspection Reconsidered. The Journal of the History of Behavioural Sciences, 241-262.
Darwin, C. (1859). The Origin of Species. London: John Murray.
Eikeseth, S. (2009). Outcome of comprehensive psycho-educational interventions for young children with autism. Res Dev Disabel, 1(30), 158-178.
Fletcher-Janzen, E. (2002). Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis (JABA). In E. Fletcher- Janzen, & C. R. Reynolds (Ed.), Concise Encyclopedia of Special Education: A Reference for the Education of the Handicapped and Other Exceptional Children and Adults (p. 542). New York: John Wiley & Sons, inc.
Fried, I., Mukamel, R., & Kreiman, G. (2011). Internally generated preactivation of single neurons in human medial frontal cortex predicts volition. Neuron, 69, 548-562.
Graham, S. R. (1990, August 10). Citation for outstanding lifetime contribution to psychology. American Psychologist, 45, 1205.
Haggbloom, S. J., Warnick, R., Warnick , J. E., Jones, V. K., Yarbrough, G. L., Russell, T. M., & Al, E. (2002). The 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th century. Review of General Psychology, 6, 139-152.
Myers, S. M., & Johnson, C. P. (2007). Managment of Children with Spectrum Disorders. Pediatrics, 120(5), 1162-1182.
O 'Neil, W. M. (1995). American Behaviorism: A Historical and Critical Analysis. Theory & Psychology, 285-305.
Palmer, D. C. (2006). On Chomsky 's Appraisal of Skinner 's Verbal Behaviour: A Half Century of Misunderstanding. The Behavior Analyst, 2(29), 253-267.
Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes: An investigation of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex . London: Oxford University Press.
Rogers, S. J., & Vismara, L. A. (2008). Evidence- based comprehensive treatments for early autism. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol, 1(35), 8-38.
Schwitzgebel, E. (2014, 11 27). Introspection. Retrieved from The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=introspection
Shreck, K. A., Metz, B., Mulick, J. A., & Smith, A. (2000). Making a fit: A Proactive Look at Models of Early Intensve Behavioural Intervention for Children with Autism. The Behaviour Analyst Today, 3, 27-32.
Skinner , B. F. (1945). The operational analysis of psychological terms. Psychological Review, 52, 270- 277, 290-294.
Soon, C. S., Brass, M., H.-J. H., & J.-D. H. (2008). Unconcious determinants of free decisions in the human brain. Nature Neuroscience, 11, 543-545.
Tanner, J. (2008, February 9th). Whytt and Magendie’s Reflexes. Retrieved from Brainy Behaviour: http://www.brainybehavior.com/blog/2008/02/whytt-and-magendies-reflexes/
Thorndike, E. L. (1911). Animal Intelligence: Experimental studies. New York: Hafner.
Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 20, 158-178.
Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology from the standpoint of a behaviouist. Psychological Review, 20, 77-158.
Watson, J. B. (1914). Behavior. New York: Holt.
Weiss, M. J., & Delmolino, L. (2006). The Relationship Between Early Learning Rates and Treatment Outcome For Children With Autism Receiving Intensive Home-Based Applied Behavour Analysis. The Behaviour Analyst, 1, 96-105.
Whytt, R. (1900). Dictionary of National Biography (Vol. 61). (S. Lee, Ed.) London: Smyth, Elder & Co.
Early psychology took an introspective approach into investigating how the ‘mind’ worked. Conscious experience was regarded as a purely mental process that was not a publically observable behaviour. Psychologists of the time used introspective research methods to analyse and report the conscious experiences of themselves and their assistants. This popular approach to psychological research led to much controversy over the ‘scientific’ nature of psychology. The introspective research methods used within psychology were criticised for being unscientific, vague and lacking in objectivity. Further ammunition was also drawn from the verity that the experiences of one person could not …show more content…
be generalised to understand the mental capacity of another (Schwitzgebel, 2014).
Whilst psychology continued to flounder as a scientific discipline; the field physiology advanced. In 1751 Professor Robert Whytt, published his monograph on reflex behaviour and ‘the vital and other involuntary motions of animals’. His monograph outlined the principles of ‘sentient’, which refers to the ability to see or feel things. Whytt distinguished between voluntary and involuntary reflexes. Stating that voluntary reflexes, if practiced enough, became habits. These habits becoming more automatic with practice (Whytt, 1900). Such discoveries in the field of physiology helped to lay the foundations for an empirical approach to the study of psychology (Tanner, 2008).
Watson (1913) and Pavlov (1927) drew inspiration from these earlier studies on reflex behaviour. Subsequently in 1927 Pavlov uncovered the ‘conditional reflex,’ and is today renowned for classical conditioning. In 1913 Watson outlined his ideas for a new, more objective and scientific direction for psychology. Watson argued that psychology should adopt the philosophy of behaviourism and that attention should be diverted away from the study of the ‘mind,’ and private events. He instead postulated that the main focus of psychologists should be placed on the easily observable facet of stimulus – response behaviour in humans and animals. Inspired by past studies, Watson argued that it was not thoughts, but a series of involuntary responses, or reflexes combined, that formed complex behaviour (Watson, 1914).
Philosophically drawing inspiration from the theory of Evolution (Darwin, 1859), behaviourism gave an empirical, morphological, non-dualistic approach to the study of psychology by helping to identify continuity in psychological function across species. Behaviourism also rejected the concept of dualism, and explicitly defined psychology as the science of behaviour. It must be noted though that whilst Watson’s version of behaviourism could account for behaviours in primitive organisms, the theory’s great weakness lay in the fact that it could not account for the many voluntary behaviours displayed by humans (O 'Neil, 1995).
Studies by Thorndike expanded further upon the field of behaviourism by facilitating the explanation of voluntary behaviours. Thorndike studied animal intelligence, observing the way in which animals could learn instrumentally, as was evidenced in his ‘puzzle box’ experiments. Each experiment would entail of a voracious cat being placed into a ‘puzzle box’ until through trial and error the feline would pull a loop within the box to open the door. After receiving the stimulus, the subject would be returned to the box to repeat the trial. With each succeeding trial the animal would learn to make less inefficient movements, eventually leaning to immediately pull the loop on entry to the cage, as a means to escape and obtain food. Thorndike referred to this as a ‘satisfying state of affairs’, the opposite scenario would produce an ‘annoying state of affairs’. Thorndike later named this relationship between behaviour and its consequences ‘the law of effect’, identifying that behaviour was a function of its consequences (Thorndike, 1911). Thorndike was not the first to notice that consequences influenced behaviour; but instead was the first to show that behaviour could be systematically strengthened or weakened by its consequences.
Thorndike’s contribution to psychology proved to be instrumental in the understanding of learning and behaviour; laying root to the foundations of Skinner’s law of reinforcement, and Radical behaviourism.
B.F. Skinner labelled behaviours that were affected by reinforcement as operant, setting it apart from classical conditioning and involuntary, respondent ‘reflex’ behaviours. Skinner also claimed that the laws of operant behaviour could explain more complex human behaviour, solving the paradoxical quandary Watson (1913) had encountered in his studies. Modern behaviourism added the principles of operant behaviour to Watson’s (1913) and Pavlov’s (1927) findings on stimulus- response reactions to get a more cohesive understanding of behaviour. The principles of Skinners law of reinforcement stated that the acquisition of behaviour resulted from a three component contingent relationship. The interconnected relationship being between the antecedent or discriminative stimuli that preceded a response, the consequences or reinforcing stimuli that followed a response and the operant response itself. Skinner labelled his new cataloguing of behaviourism as behaviour analysis (Baum, 2011). In 1945 Skinner first used the term ‘radical behaviourism’ within his writing (Skinner , 1945) . The term radical behaviourism is also often used to refer to the school of psychology known as the experimental analysis of behaviour. Skinner described radical behaviourism as ‘throughgoing,’because unlike earlier forms of behaviourism it fully embraced all aspects of human functioning. It was ‘radical’ in the respect that it did not deny or ignore important aspects of human functions. It employed the observational methods of a natural science, supplemented with interpretive extensions, based on earlier tried and tested behavioural principles (Baum, 2011).
Though radical behaviourism stemmed from Behaviourism, it was a distinctly different philosophy. Skinner’s contribution to radical behaviourism is often mistakenly looked at from a mechanical perspective, incorrectly considered as a philosophy that is only concerned with stimulus – response behaviours, interested only in what goes into and comes out of an organism, consisting of no more than experimental techniques that ignore any private events that may occur within an animal. Unlike classical behaviourism which dismisses private events as ‘epiphenomena’, radical behaviourism does not rule out the study of private events as unscientific, as is often misconstrued. Radical behaviourism acknowledges private events but regards them as behavioural, rather than mental processes. This is because private events include thoughts, feelings, emotions and attitudes that are only observable to the person in which they reside. Radical behaviourism instead uses environmental events that change behaviour to explain caused behaviour. This is because explanations that use private events to explain a public behaviour, present a problem as they will almost certainly have an environmental explanation (Baum, 2011) .
In 1958 the first Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour (JEAB) was published. Behaviour Analysts found that many variables heavily influenced behaviour, forming the basis for the first laws of voluntary behaviour. These laws were systematically applied as interventions to behaviours to solve behavioural problems. This was achieved by focusing on the observable relationship between behaviour, in reaction to its environment, through the use of antecedents and consequences, resulting in the birth of applied behaviour analysis (ABA) (Fletcher-Janzen, 2002). ABA is still widely utilised today, most notably in the treatment of Autism. Though it has been criticised that the effectiveness of ABA may limited by diagnostic severity and IQ, (Shreck, Metz, Mulick, & Smith, 2000), (Weiss & Delmolino, 2006) its efficiency as a treatment for those with Autism is clearly evident (Myers & Johnson, 2007), (Rogers & Vismara, 2008)& (Eikeseth, 2009).
In regards to the success of ABA, many argue that modern day psychology still lives in shadow of the behaviourist revolt against introspection, its credibility tarnished. It is claimed that one of the many positives of using introspective methods is that it can give valuable insights into the more ‘human’ side of psychology; focusing less on empirical data, and more on humans as individuals (Danziger, 1980). Controversially a study by Soon, Brass, Hans-Jochen, & John-Dylan (2008) may have laid to rest the argument for the use of introspective methods in psychological research. Participants’ brain activity was simultaneously monitored by the researchers while they spontaneously decided to press a button with either their left or right index fingers. Results from the study showed that the conscious decision to push the button was made on average 1 second before the button was physically pushed. Through the analysis of a repeated patterns of neuronal brain activity, researchers could predict the outcome of the decision a participant would make up to 7 seconds before they had consciously even made the decision. A study by Fried, Mukamel, & Kreiman (2011) expanded further by studying individuals with electrodes implanted into their brains, as part of a surgical procedure to treat epilepsy. The experiment showed activity in individual neurons of particular brain areas on average 1.5 seconds before a participant had made a conscious decision to press the button. This meant that the researchers could predict the timing of a decision on average 700 milliseconds before the conscious decision was made to do so. The results from these studies imply that conscious decision is in fact secondary to brain activity, with unconscious brain activity shaping the decisions an individual makes. Far from being held ‘hostage’ by neuronal brain activity the results suggest a ‘dualism’ between the conscious mind and brain activity, working in harmony with beliefs and desires (Soon, Brass, Hans-Jochen, & John-Dylan, 2008). This holds major consequences for the argument for the use of humanistic approaches to psychology and introspective research methods. It must be considered that if an individual’s conscious is encoded so closely in brain activity, it is almost certainly impossible to make a distinction between brain activity and the conscious ‘mind’. This renders introspective methods obsolete with the advances of modern day technology. Furthermore it suggests that the conscious ‘mind’ and brain activity are not two separate entities existing in two separate spaces, but rather different aspects of the same physical process. The brain containing a deterministic mechanism that unfolds, leading the conscious decisions an individual makes at a later point in time. This insinuates that the decisions one makes are inevitable, extinguishing an argument for freewill. These recent studies only strengthen the argument for the research methods used within radical behaviourism as it uses environmental causes to explain behaviour, rather than mentalism.
In 1957 Skinner applied his focus to the human behaviour of linguistics. His book ‘Verbal Behaviour’ was almost entirely theoretical, involving little experimental research. Noam Chomsky (1959) attacked Skinner’s book, misunderstanding, the distinction between experimental analysis, interpretation, and the relation between the two in the field of radical behaviourism. From the perspective of most behaviour analysts Chomsky’s review was ill conceived. Though rhetorically effective it was also conceptually flawed (Palmer, 2006). This consequently sparked what is referred to by its factions as the ‘Cognitive Revolution’, though this is questionable, as ABA techniques are far from obsolete and still widely used today.
Fortunately radicallism is by no means ‘dead’ as cogintive revolutionists may claim.
Radical behaviourism was indeed ‘radical’, challenging the traditional notions of freedom and dignity, adding validity to a field previously considered ‘unscientific’. It forced society to consider the possibiltity that all organisms, no matter what their species, are controlled by contingencies of reinforcement, with society being nothing more than a set of contingences of reiforcement. Radical behaviourism will forever be challenged as it creates an unsettling, almost incomphrenhensible image that mankind is not autonomous, and is in no way a unique organism. By graciously accepting such within the scientfic community, the technology of behaviour has been used to significanly reduce the aversive consquences of behaviour, and maximise the achievement of indivduals who may have previously been considered lost causes, for example in the treatment of those on the autistic spectrum. The confidence in the effectiveness of ABA techniques is evidenced the recommendations for further investment in the future development of ABA (Clement- Jones & Baldwin, 2011). It could be agrued that advances in cognitive neuroscience weaken a case for the validity of radical behaviourism, but this is untrue; exciting studies by Soon, Brass, Hans-Jochen, & John-Dylan (2008) & Fried, Mukamel, & Kreiman (2011) have only added further staying power to the behaviourist movement, strengthenng an arguement against freewill. Technological advances in the cognitive neuroscience of psychology provides a means of progressing the field of psychology further by combining both proven radical behaviourism techniques and modern advances in cognitive neuroscience. Radical behaviourim is by no means dead, it is merely
evolving.
References
Baum, W. M. (2011). What is Radical Behaviourism? A review of Jay Moore 's Conceptual Foundations of Radical Behaviourism. Journal of Experiemental Analysis of Behaviour, 1(95), 119-126. doi:10.1901/jeab.2011.95-119
Chomsky, N. (1959). Review of Veral Behaviour, by B.F. Skinner. Language(35), 26-57.
Clement- Jones, L., & Baldwin, N. (2011, March 17). The Cost- Effectiveness of Early Intervention. Retrieved from Ambitious About Autism: http://www.ambitiousaboutautism.org.uk/lib/liDownload/224/Early%20Intervention%20HoL%20Debate_AmbitiousAboutAutism%20briefing_150311.pdf?CFID=22037642&CFTOKEN=36916020
Danziger, K. (1980). The History of Introspection Reconsidered. The Journal of the History of Behavioural Sciences, 241-262.
Darwin, C. (1859). The Origin of Species. London: John Murray.
Eikeseth, S. (2009). Outcome of comprehensive psycho-educational interventions for young children with autism. Res Dev Disabel, 1(30), 158-178.
Fletcher-Janzen, E. (2002). Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis (JABA). In E. Fletcher- Janzen, & C. R. Reynolds (Ed.), Concise Encyclopedia of Special Education: A Reference for the Education of the Handicapped and Other Exceptional Children and Adults (p. 542). New York: John Wiley & Sons, inc.
Fried, I., Mukamel, R., & Kreiman, G. (2011). Internally generated preactivation of single neurons in human medial frontal cortex predicts volition. Neuron, 69, 548-562.
Graham, S. R. (1990, August 10). Citation for outstanding lifetime contribution to psychology. American Psychologist, 45, 1205.
Haggbloom, S. J., Warnick, R., Warnick , J. E., Jones, V. K., Yarbrough, G. L., Russell, T. M., & Al, E. (2002). The 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th century. Review of General Psychology, 6, 139-152.
Myers, S. M., & Johnson, C. P. (2007). Managment of Children with Spectrum Disorders. Pediatrics, 120(5), 1162-1182.
O 'Neil, W. M. (1995). American Behaviorism: A Historical and Critical Analysis. Theory & Psychology, 285-305.
Palmer, D. C. (2006). On Chomsky 's Appraisal of Skinner 's Verbal Behaviour: A Half Century of Misunderstanding. The Behavior Analyst, 2(29), 253-267.
Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes: An investigation of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex . London: Oxford University Press.
Rogers, S. J., & Vismara, L. A. (2008). Evidence- based comprehensive treatments for early autism. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol, 1(35), 8-38.
Schwitzgebel, E. (2014, 11 27). Introspection. Retrieved from The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=introspection
Shreck, K. A., Metz, B., Mulick, J. A., & Smith, A. (2000). Making a fit: A Proactive Look at Models of Early Intensve Behavioural Intervention for Children with Autism. The Behaviour Analyst Today, 3, 27-32.
Skinner , B. F. (1945). The operational analysis of psychological terms. Psychological Review, 52, 270- 277, 290-294.
Soon, C. S., Brass, M., H.-J. H., & J.-D. H. (2008). Unconcious determinants of free decisions in the human brain. Nature Neuroscience, 11, 543-545.
Tanner, J. (2008, February 9th). Whytt and Magendie’s Reflexes. Retrieved from Brainy Behaviour: http://www.brainybehavior.com/blog/2008/02/whytt-and-magendies-reflexes/
Thorndike, E. L. (1911). Animal Intelligence: Experimental studies. New York: Hafner.
Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 20, 158-178.
Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology from the standpoint of a behaviouist. Psychological Review, 20, 77-158.
Watson, J. B. (1914). Behavior. New York: Holt.
Weiss, M. J., & Delmolino, L. (2006). The Relationship Between Early Learning Rates and Treatment Outcome For Children With Autism Receiving Intensive Home-Based Applied Behavour Analysis. The Behaviour Analyst, 1, 96-105.
Whytt, R. (1900). Dictionary of National Biography (Vol. 61). (S. Lee, Ed.) London: Smyth, Elder & Co.